Will the new commuter terminal at National lead to International flights?

[Anonymous]

Just curious or are the runways still to short?

[Anonymous]

What do you think?

[Anonymous]

Are the runways still too short.

LOLOLOL

[Anonymous]

LOL.

[Anonymous]

Intl to Europe? Probably not. The runways are too short for wide-body planes, but if someone can figure out how to fly a luxury narrow-body from DCA to London or Paris...sure. And probably some flights to Central American and Caribbean destinations.

[Anonymous]

No the new commuter terminal at National will not lead to International flights.

[Anonymous]

No! They are trying to do less long distance flights not more!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No! They are trying to do less long distance flights not more!

The only people who want fewer long distance flights are the folks who live on the flight path, which pretty soon is going to get a whole lot worse. And they have been losing that argument for 20 years. I expect to see more domestic nonstops to la, San Fran, Seattle, and the like. Dulles has been losing pax every year and will continue to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just curious or are the runways still to short?

It's not just the runways. There's no customs or immigration there, other than a very small staff for private jets.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand, how are the runways so short that they can't support wide body jets. I see jets land on them all the time.

[Anonymous]

international to canada

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand, how are the runways so short that they can't support wide body jets. I see jets land on them all the time.

737s and A319/320s (smaller jets) can land on them.

747s, 777s, A330s, A340s, and A380s cannot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand, how are the runways so short that they can't support wide body jets. I see jets land on them all the time.

Wide-body = multiple aisles
Narrow-body = single aisle

The main runway at DCA is +/- 7,100 ft
A 737 requires minimum 5,300 to 6,700 foot length (depending on type)
A 787 (the wide-body with the shortest min runway length) needs 8,300

Technically an Airbus A330 could get down to about 7,000 ft so maybe someone enterprising would try that. And before someone shouts out "But an L1011 crashed" yes they used to fly those in and out of DCA, and they were at the bare minimum for runway requirements and had to load carefully to get weights right.

[Anonymous]

I was literally on a wide body jet that landed at Reagan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was literally on a wide body jet that landed at Reagan.

When and what airline? Where were you flying from?